User talk:Don Pedro28

Welcome to the Commons, Don Pedro28!

First steps tutorial Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki - it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}} For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

Yann 17:54, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Viola hirta.JPG

You uploaded this image which you claim to be your own work. On the upload page you agreed to place it under a Free license but did not specify which one. Please do so by replacing the {{OwnWork}} tag with a suitable copyright tag. GeorgHH 10:08, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

It is my own work, but I uploaded this image and I forgot to write license. Now it is good, I reparair it. Is it good now?--Don Pedro28 20:21, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

File:Ornithogalum kochii2.JPG

Dear Don Pedro, I am advising you to re-upload this picture after having rotated it by 90°. Best regards, --Réginald (To reply) 07:45, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

OK, but this photo is not good.--Don Pedro28 (talk) 12:56, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear Don Pedro,

You may always upload a new version of a picture. I have done so some times when I or the administrators were not happy with one of my uploaded pictures.

Best regards, --Réginald (To reply) 17:24, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, Don Pedro28!

Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 11:29, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

• Image:Equisetum ramosissimum3.JPG was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Equisetum ramosissimum5.JPG was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Salix lapponum4.JPG was uncategorized on 22 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:08, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Prudký potok1.JPG

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 19:59, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Bad image of Eriophorum sp.

Dear Petr,

You are right. This is obviously not E. angustifolium but E. vaginatum. I have renamed it to File:Eriophorum vaginatum 001.jpg. I have also adapted the multiligual summary accordingly.

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 11:29, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Dear Réginald,

Thank you very much. There are 5 other bad images of Eriophorum angustifolium: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Media_requiring_renaming, 4x probably E. vaginatum, 1x the plant of the family Asteraceae, Cirsium??? Best regards, --Don Pedro28 (talk) 12:50, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Dear Petr,

I have renamed the 5 other images, 4 of which were indeed clearly of E. vaginatum. The 5th is of a creeping thistle (Cirsium arvense).

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 14:29, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much, now it is OK.--Don Pedro28 (talk) 21:08, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Coniferous trees of Arboretum Žampach

Hello Don Pedro - yes, unfortunately, many of the Žampach plants are mis-labelled. The example you give File:Picea mariana zampach1.JPG is not at all like Picea mariana, compare e.g. this photo: File:Picea mariana cones Yukon2.jpg, see how very different (short and thick) the leaves are compared to the Žampach plant. I suspect a lot of the Žampach plants are grown from seed collected from gardens, which often gives hybrid seed: File:Picea mariana zampach1.JPG looks as if it could be a hybrid Picea sitchensis × Picea mariana, though it is not possible to be certain without cones. I hope this helps! - MPF (talk) 15:58, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello

The branch of Picea mariana from Žampach is the sterile branch from the young tree, this is different from the branch of mature tree with cones, this is variable. Hybrid of Picea sitchensis and P. mariana is fertile or sterile? I do not know. But this tree is young, there are not cones. Sterile branch of young Abies sp. div. is very different from the fertile branch of adult tree too (in ordering leaves on branch etc.) The exemplar in the native range may be different from the cultivated tree in the other climate. I ask men of arboretum Žampach about these problems of mis-labelled trees.--Don Pedro28 (talk) 16:49, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Yes, immature foliage on young trees does differ from mature cone-bearing foliage, but I am familiar with the differences ;-) - MPF (talk) 17:12, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello Don - I took a more detailed look at File:Abies squamata zampach1.JPG and 2; they key out as Abies holophylla. This accords with what I have come across elsewhere, that in the past, seed batches of Abies holophylla were distributed by a Chinese forestry organisation to numerous botanical gardens, mislabelled as several other different Abies species. I will rename the files; can you pass the identification on to Žampach, please? Thanks! - MPF (talk) 11:22, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello MPF. Thank you. It is possible, I am not the specialist of the genus Abies and I belive you that you are right.--Don Pedro28 (talk) 18:36, 16 March 2013 (UTC)